Letter: City commissioners and The Record out of line

Editor: This is in response to the "Editorial: Travel idea not good for the city" by the St. Augustine Record on June 28.

The Record's editorial staff states that the "new (city) administration, led by Mayor George Gardner" is feeding at the "public trough."

While Mayor Gardner appears to be feeding at the trough, The Record contradicts itself by blaming this on the "new city administration."

In reviewing the vote and context on this issue, Errol Jones has to be exempted from this "new" administration while Bill Lennon, from the "old" administration" has to be included in the new if you read the vote.

For The St. Augustine Record editorial staff to say it is up to Bill Lennon to "correct the matter" after Lennon voted the same as Gardner and Crichlow is a strange reach for the editorial staff.

Commissioner Lennon lamely stated that he was unaware of what he was voting for.

Why doesn't The Record editorial staff ask why Lennon doesn't know what he is voting for?

Does not knowing exempt him from his vote, or is not knowing what makes The Record editorial staff recognize that he is really from the "old" administration?

Why wouldn't The Record ask all three commissioners to reverse their votes?

Is The Record trying to create a polarizing issue of new or old administrations as The Record frames it?

Why is The Record's editorial staff framing it this way?

Commissioners are elected -- they come and go.

All of them are self-interested which can be good or bad for the taxpayer constituents depending on the decisions they make for the city as a whole.

I voted for George Gardner, Errol Jones and Don Crichlow to change the city's direction from pro-development of everything to a balance of the diverse needs of the citizens of the city.

I further voted for George Gardner because he promised in his campaign to review city Manager Bill Harriss' contract.

If the electorate thinks that a mayor or commissioners don't do their jobs, then we'll get another chance to vote them out.

It is unfortunate we can't do the same with city management.

It is up to us to be the watchdogs of city commission and city management. As their past history suggests, inclusive of the previous two administrations, they should be highly scrutinized in how they conduct the city's business.

For The Record's editorial staff to editorially polarize the current commission into old and new administrations is journalistically irresponsible when looking at the vote over the "travel issue" and the rest of their votes to date. The new commissioners have not voted in lockstep.

For The Record editorial staff to suggest that the political retreads and spares of the previous administration look pretty solid by comparison makes me wonder what The Record's self-interest is.

And what is Mr. Lennon doing voting if he doesn't know what he is voting on? He could at least recuse himself for ignorance.

I agree with the editorial staff of The Record that travel for spouses paid for by the taxpayer is "not a good idea."

Gardner, Crichlow, and Lennon were the ones out of line -- and in my opinion, so is The Record's editorial staff.